Legal Opinion
B & H Auto Supply, Inc. v. Andrews
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided July 7, 1967No. 16930PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DIXON, Chief Justice.
B & H Auto Supply, Inc., a corporation, and Floyd Hardin, individually, doing business as B & H Auto Supply, have appealed from a personal judgment against them in favor of appellees Adolphus Andrews, Jr. and others doing business as Andrews-Dill-ingham Properties, for an alleged violation of the Bulk Sales Law, Art. 4001, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St.
The above named statute has been repealed, the present Bulk Sales Law being Sections 6-101 to 6-106 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which went into effect at midnight June 30, 1966. However, the transactions here involved took place…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. PierceTexas Supreme Court · 1954
- Fischer v. Rio Tire Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1933
- Gardner v. Goodner Wholesale Grocery Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1923
- Southwestern Drug Corp. v. McKesson & Robbins, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1943
- Settegast v. Second National BankTexas Supreme Court · 1935
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mack v. NewtonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
- American Express Co., S. A. I. v. Bomar Shoe Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
- Anderson & Clayton Co. v. EarnestCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980
- Schlussel v. Emmanuel Roth Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1994
- Theodore MacK Receiver, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Wade Newton, Defendants-Third-Party Equico Lessors, Inc., Defendant-Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. G.J. Roberts, Sr., Third-Party Brazos Enterprises, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984